MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3110275257 · doi:10.28991/cej-2020-03091622

New Approach for Simulating Reinforced Concrete Walls in Quasi-static Loading

2020· article· en· W3110275257 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCivil Engineering Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStructural engineeringCrackingTension (geology)Reinforced concreteReinforced solidPoint (geometry)Displacement (psychology)Computer scienceMaterials scienceEngineeringMathematicsComposite materialUltimate tensile strengthGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The main objective of this article is to apply a simplified model to simulate the overall behavior of a reinforced concrete wall without the need to explicitly represent the reinforcing bars in the model nor the progressive degradations of the concrete in tension. The model takes into account the fictitious laws of the material, in order to estimate the capacity of the studied model and its performance to simulate the complex behavior of concrete. The law of the fictitious behavior of reinforced concrete tie rods is based on the shape of the adhesion curve between steel and concrete. Relationships covering the cracking stage up to the elastic limit of steel are proposed according to the properties of concrete and steel materials, the percentage of steel. An analytical computational model is then implemented in the Matlab programming language. Necessary transformations for the integration of the law of fictitious average behavior of steel in the Abaqus software were carried out thus making it possible to make a considerable advance from the point of view of validation of the developed law. The general formulation of the tension law applies to sections where the reinforcements are distributed so that the resistance of the entire section is mobilized. Hence the need to introduce an effective area around the rebars for the application of the fictitious tension law to reinforced concrete walls. Numerical simulations have been validated using an example of reinforced concrete wall subjected to a quasi-static loading. Load-displacement responses are compared and the numerical results approaches well the experimental one. By using the law of the fictitious diagram of the concrete and by defining the effective tensile zone of the wall, the model makes it possible to save a considerable time of calculation compared to a traditional calculation in EF on Abaqus. Doi: 10.28991/cej-2020-03091622 Full Text: PDF

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.780
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.210 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it